tv U.S. House of Representatives CSPAN December 1, 2010 5:00pm-7:59pm EST
of the kind. they have never had to operate and maintain before because these are energy efficient, new state-of-the-art materials. in order to maintain this extraordinary investment, this once-in-a-lifetime investment for the congress, we will want a work force that is trained and operating to keep this inventory at peak performance so we don't see it deteriorate before our eyes as we have seen so much of the federal inventory. . inventory. we now know that design and construction costs for example only about 5% or 10%
could i have an additional minute? >> 5% or 10% of the cost of a facility. but operations and maintainance represents 60% to 85% of the cost of a facility over its ifetime. we have saved the taxpayer money by investing in energy efficiency and now we're going to save money for all of us and the taxpayers by investing in what it will take, curriculum and training to keep these buildings at peak performance and there bep by to maximize our investment. may i thank the gentleman for his hard work and for yielding the speaker pro tempore: the yields back. the gentleman from florida is recognized. i diaz-balart: before recognize the following member, i don't know how many other opportunities as ranking member
going to have here on the floor and i just want to mention what a privilege it has been to work with my chairwoman. she has been wonderful to work with. working a great relationship and i think that working relationship has grown friendship and i want to thank her for always being extremely courteous to me and i also need to mention chairman oberstar and i was able to speak to him at length and i if i didn't ss mention how i enjoyed working with him. she has been mentioned a couple of times, the gentlelady from the state of illinois, representative biggert. as much time as she would like o consume. the speaker pro tempore: the gentlewoman from illinois is recognized. mrs. biggert: thank you and i the gentleman for yielding me the time. i would like to begin by my colleagues senator
carper and senator collins and my co-chair of the high performance building caucus, representative carnahan and representative pete sessions for their hard work in bringing this bipartisan legislation for us today. the federal buildings personnel act of 2010 will save taxpayers dollars as has been times by putting federal buildings on the cutting edge of energy efficiency and will help build expertise among america's work force needed for tomorrow's green jobs. as my colleagues are aware, the is the government nation's largest property manager with more than 500,000 buildings and structures worldwide, so this bill presents an opportunity to lead by example and to demonstrate the and efficiency that can be achieved by making smart investments in human
energy through the federal work force. ensure that l help federal buildings are operating at peak efficiency and equip federal employees who maintain our buildings to utilize green building technology, implement industry best practices and cut the public. for madam speaker, thanks to american scientists and we are making rapid strides in sustainable building technology and design, but the full rewards of this work, both to the environment and taxpayers cannot be realized unless our building managers have the training to utilize them. the federal buildings personnel the ngs act will require general services administration to identify core competencies necessary for federal personnel to utilize high performance practices and technologies. the g.s.a. will work with private industry and
institutions of higher learning to create comprehensive courses to ducation ensure that the federal employees know how to employ green technology. this training will ensure that the federal government can meet its energy reduction goals and give a proper rereturn on taxpayers' investments. they are demanding a renewed focus on eliminating wasteful bipartisan this bill presents an opportunity to do just that while conserving our domestic energy supply. the federal buildings personnel training act will put us in the forefront of building technology and transform our nation's building stock for years to come. makes anmportantly, it investment in the training of our work force that will help for the workers compete green jobs of tomorrow. again, i would like to thank the entleman from missouri, my colleague and co-chair of the high performance building caucus for his hard work in bringing
forward this bill. and i would like to thank chairman norton for her support and ranking member mica and particularly chairman oberstar. he will certainly be missed here on this house floor and i know that we all wish him well. with that, i urge my colleagues to support this bill and i yield back the balance of my time. the speaker pro tempore: the gentlewoman yields back the balance of her time. the gentleman from missouri is recognized. mr. carnahan: we have no further speakers. mr. carnahan: i yield back. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman yields back the balance of his time. the gentleman from florida is recognized. mr. diaz-balart: i yield back my time.nder part of the speaker pro tempore: the question is, will the house suspend the rules and pass senate 3250. those in favor say aye. those opposed, no. in the opinion of the chair, 2/3 being in the affirmative, the rules are
suspended, the bill is passed and without objection, the motion to reconsider is laid on the table. the speaker pro tempore: for what purpose does the gentleman from missouri seek recognition? mr. carnahan: i move to suspend the rules and agree to the resolution h. res. 1669 as amended congratulating the national air transportation its iation for celebrating 70th anniversary. the speaker pro tempore: the clerk will report title of the resolution. the clerk: house resolution 1669, resolution congratulating the national air transportation association for celebrating its 70th anniversary. the speaker pro tempore: pursuant to the prule, the gentleman from missouri, mr. carnahan, and the gentleman from
wisconsin, mr. petri each will control 20 minutes. mr. carnahan: i ask unanimous consent that all members may legislative days within which to revise and extend their remarks and include extraneous material on h. res. 1669. the speaker pro tempore: without objection, so ordered. the entleman is recognized mr. carnahan: i yield myself such time as i may consume. the eaker pro tempore: gentleman is recognized. mr. carnahan: i rise in support of h. res. 1669 as amended, which congratulates the national air transportation association for celebrating its 70th anniversary. this resolution recognizes napa, which played a role in the general aviation in the united states. 1940, at aounding in time when general aviation in the u.s. was at a crossroads, napa has grown to represent more than 2,000 companies that own,
operate and service aircraft and provide services to general and aircraft owners. it serves as these companies' advocates before policy and lawmakers. it is a contributor to the u.s. economy. founding, the national air transportation association has played a major role in advocating for a vibrant and healthy general aviation industry. h. res. 1669 recognizes the historical contributions to general aviation and congratulates them for the 70th i urge my and colleagues to join me in resolution. is i reserve. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman reserves the balance of his time. the gentleman from wisconsin is recognized. speaker, i adam yield such time as he may oughtor of the resolution, my -- author of the
dunch and. mr. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman is recognized. the uncan: i thank gentleman from wisconsin for yielding me this time. i rise today in support of house 1669 to congratulate and compliment the national air transportation association on its 70th anniversary and for its aviation in eneral the united states of america. it's the leading organization representing aviation services and aircraft rs management companies. at the start of world war ii, the federal government drafted plans to ground all general aviation for the duration of the war. such a ban would have crippled general aviation for years to come. 83 founding members started the ofa in 1940 with the purpose showing how private aviation can be an asset to our country and to its national security and certainly not a threat. in fact, the nata helped saved
the civilian training pilot program that was created by president roosevelt. this program trained thousands of pilots to fly and contributed to the war effort. nata represents over 2,000 member companies that own, operate or service aircraft and of the or the needs traveling public by offering services and products to aircraft operators and others such as fuel sales, aircraft maintenance, parts sales, storage, rental airline services, flight training, part 135 on demand air charters, program, aircraft management and schedule commuter operations from smaller aircraft. there are more than 230,000 in the afe aircraft united states which use 19,000 small and regional airports. airports help make people and industries that do not have our larger to
commercial airports. the general aviation industry millions of jobs and contributes $150 billion to the u.s. economy. general aviation is a vital component of the transportation industry in the united states. not only does the association represent aviation interests in active n, it takes an role in promoting aviation in our communities. nata provides grants to schools for the purpose of purchasing educational materials. nata provides scholarships to young people who are interest nd pursuing a career in aviation. madam speaker, i served as hairman of the subcommittee on aviation for six years and i personally witnessed the national air transportation association's tireless efforts on behalf of private aviation. to mention that the president of this association is a former colleague,. while in congress, he regularly from his
congressional district in pennsylvania. he has served in this position since 1994 and i would like to say that the members of the nata are very fortunate to have with his knowledge to lead their association. i introduced this resolution to recognize this association and private butions to aviation. i hope my colleagues will join me in support of this bill. and i yield back the balance of my time. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman yields back the the e of his time. gentleman from missouri is recognized. r. carnahan: i reserve at this time. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman reserves the balance of his time. the gentleman from wisconsin is ecognized. mr. petri: i rise in support of the resolution before us colleague from tennessee, mr. duncan congratulating the national air traffic association celebrating its 70th anniversary. the resolution applauds the association's efforts over the years to improve general bolster the ty and
general aviation industry. nata represents over 2,000 companies that provide millions of jobs in the united states that support the general aviation industry. member companies provide for many of the behind-the-scenes support for general aviation, including fuel sails, aircraft maintenance, parts sails, flight storage to name a few. these sectors support jobs for millions of americans and contribute $150 billion to the united states' economy. role in the big resurgence of general aviation after world war ii and continues to play an important advocacy role for its member companies. most importantly, the plays an important role in improving safety for its mber companies and the traveling public. i i support the resolution and to adopt the gues resolution. no further requests for time and yield back. the speaker pro tempore: the
gentleman yields back the balance of his time. the gentleman from missouri is recognized. mr. carnahan: i want to thank tennessee, n from mr. duncan and his service on the aviation committee and i with him and king for him bringing this to the floor. we don't have any further speakers. and i would just encourage the body to adopt this resolution and i yield back the balance of time. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman yields back the balance of his time. the question is, will the house agree to rules and house resolution 1669 as amended. those in favor say aye. those opposed, no. in the opinion of the chair, 2/3 being in the the rules are suspended, the resolution is agreed to and without objection, laidotion to reconsider is on the table. .
the speaker pro tempore: the -- the clerk: leaves of abc for mrs. mcmorris rodgers for today and the balance of the week. the speaker pro tempore: without objection, the request is granted. the chair will entertain requests for one-minute speeches. for what purpose does the gentlewoman from ohio seek recognition? mrs. schmidt: i ask unanimous consent to address the house for one minute and to revise and extend my remarks. the speaker pro tempore: without objection, the gentlewoman is recognized. mrs. schmidt: thank you, madam speaker. i rise today with all of cincinnati to congratulate and celebrate the cincinnati reds first baseman joey voto being crowned the -- votto being crowned the most valuable player. cincinnati has a rich and proud tradition of great baseball teams. it's the home of the first professional baseball club
which began in 1869. the reds have won five world series titles, four national league pennants, multiple most valuable player trophies and numerous golden combloff awards and a number of players have risen to the status to be celebrated in the national baseball hall of fame. and the cincinnati reds are indeed proud to have the most valuable player, joey votto, playing for them. a native of toronto, ontario, canada, mr. votto was drafted out of high school in the second round of the amateur draft in 2002. he worked his way through the reds' minor league system and debuted in september of 2007. his defensive skills and offensive production consistently improved leading up to the 2010 season. joey helped lead the cincinnati reds to their first national league central league division title since 2005 with an impressive $.324 batting
average. he led the nag legal in on-base percentage as well as slugging percentage and received 31.32 first place votes by the baseball writers association of america to reward his hard work with one of the most coveted awards in baseball, the most valuable player trophy. he was named to the national league all-star team and won the 2010 national league hank aaron award. again, i would like to join all of the red nation in congratulating mr. votto on his achievements. i want to congratulate the owner of the reds, and his ownership group for bringing a winning baseball team back to cincinnati. congratulations, joey, and go reds. the speaker pro tempore: the gentlewoman yields back. are there further requests for one-minute speeches? for what purpose does the gentlelady from ohio seek recognition? mrs. schmidt: mr. speaker, i ask unanimous consent that
today following legislative business and any special orders heretofore entered into the following members may be permitted to address the house, revise and extend their remarks and include therein extraneous material. ms. poe for five minutes and mr. jones for five minutes. the speaker pro tempore: without objection, so ordered. for what purpose does the gentleman from missouri seek recognition? mr. carnahan: i ask unanimous consent that today following legislative business and any special orders heretofore entered into the following members may be permitted to address the house for five minutes, to revise and extend their remarks and include therein extraneous material. mr. yarmuth of kentucky for five minutes. mr. klein of florida for five minutes. ms. richardson of california for five minutes. ms. kaptur of ohio for five minutes. ms. jackson lee of texas for five minutes. mr. defazio of oregon for five minutes. ms. woolsey of california for
five minutes. and mr. graceson of florida for five minutes. the speaker pro tempore: without objection, so ordered. under the speaker's announced policy of january 6, 2009 and under a previous order of the house, the following members are recognized for five minutes each. mr. yarmuth from kentucky. mr. jones, north carolina. mr. klein, florida. mr. poe, texas. ms. richardson, california. mr. garrett, new jersey. ms. kaptur, ohio. mr. burton, indiana. ms. jackson lee, texas. mr. moran, kansas. mr. defazio, oregon. for what purpose does the gentleman from florida seek
recognition? without objection. the gentleman is recognized. mr. klein: madam speaker, i rise today to thank all my colleagues here in the house and especially my constituents back home in south florida. the opportunity to serve in this body has been the privilege and honor of a lifetime. i truly have been honored and feel honored to have been entrusted with the responsibility of fighting for families, businesses, seniors and veterans in our community every single day. and fight we did. when i came in four years ago we were challenged with a war. we were challenged with a lot of other things. as those years have passed there have been new challenges, the economy and others. together we fought to take on skyrocketing homeowners insurance costs in florida and other places. we wrote a commonsense solution that makes insurance look and work like its supposed to.
it wasn't easy but we brought together every single member of florida's delegation, republican and democrat alike, as well as allies from around the country and passed the homeowners defense act in a bipartisan way. and i'm very proud of that. we also fought to deliver on a campaign promise when i first -- in my first race to close the medicare part d doughnut hole, something that's so significant to so many seniors in our community. our seniors never should make the choice between food and medicine. and because we shall and bring down the cost of prescription drugs, many in our community will no longer have to. we stand up for our nation's veterans, something that is a prize responsibility that every american shares in. because i believe it is our responsibility to fight for those who have fought for us. we passed the biggest increase in the v.a. history to make sure that our service members have access to everything they need, and we turned local ideas from our palm beach and broward county advisory boards into the
law of the land. but it didn't stop there. we took on energy and the recognition that there is a national security threat of an energy policy that continues to support middle east rogue countries. in particular, iran. i helped work with others in writing and passing the toughest sanctions in history because we cannot allow iran to acquire a nuclear weapon. not on our watch and certainly not on our dime. we tackled health care and equal pay for women. we expended pell grants so every child and every student has a write to go to college and help create a work force that will compete worldwide. we passed an innovative and forward-looking energy plan to end our dependence on foreign oil. but most of all, many of us worked together to do what is best for our community. some might disagree with any one policy, but i think at the end each of us in this chamber knows we have a responsibility to our country, we believe in our country and we try to do
the right things. madam speaker, my colleagues and south floridians watching today, i want to say thank you from the bottom of my heart for this privilege. choosings public service isn't always easy. there are bad headlines and tough attacks and long weeks away from your family. our families truly make the greatest sacrifice. but it is worth every one of those sacrifices for the opportunity to make our country better for our children and our grandchildren than it was for us. this is the american dream, and that is what i fought for and many of us fight for every single day at home and here. when i first came to this historic u.s. capitol building, a very wise colleague said to me, and it stuck with me until this very moment, look up at the capitol dome at nighttime. look at it when we're working late you see the light at the top in a beautiful dome. i look up and see that every time we are here in the evening
and i see that magnificent dome against the dark sky and i think of the great figures that have passed in time here. most we may never know. whether they were here for two years or 10 years or 20 years and everyone had the same goal, to make this country is a little better place. and my colleague said to me if you look up at that dome and you aren't inspired, it's time to go home. i continue to be inspired. and he was right. the opportunity to serve our community in that's hallowed halls does inspire me. i hope it continues to inspire every single person and the next generation of leaders who come into this chamber. so i want to thank all of you. thank you for allowing us to be here. thank you for the privilege of serving. and i look forward to being part of our community and continue to work on behalf of it. i thank you very much. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman yields back. mr. diaz-balart, florida. ms. woolsey, california.
for what purpose does the gentlelady from california seek recognition? >> request to address the house for five minutes and to revise and extend my remarks. the speaker pro tempore: without objection, the gentlewoman is recognized. ms. richardson: madam speaker, i rise today to support the dedication of the long beach rosey derivative interpreter system center. this laumple will be next september, december 11, and it will be an historic occasion, not just for long beach, not just for california but for the nation. and let me tell you why i would take five minutes out of our time to talk about this. back in world war ii from 1942 to 1945, we had six million brave women, women who stepped forward who helped us as a nation to be able to help us to really move forward to keep the economy going and to really begin to enter into a work force that they have never been part of before. in my own area, 175,000 women
bravely worked and led the way -- they were really trail blazers, and they worked at the -- trailblazers, and they worked at the douglas plant where they make the c-17. when you think of them, on average they're about 85 years old. and so it's important for us now more than ever to really acknowledge them and to thank them for their service. when we talk about the work that they did and how they supported the united states, they deserve our honor and our respect. this long beach site includes an interactive display of women, air force service pilots, who were known as wasp at that time. these women transported the airplanes. they assembled them. they actually flew them to the places where they were needed the most. because of their efforts, they were able to produce -- imagine women 300,000 airplanes, 102,000 armored vehicles,
77,000 ships, 20 million small tarms -- arms, 40 billion bullets and six million tons of bombs. they were as much a part of our success and freedom for people all over the world, the women, the rosey deriff tores, as well as the veterans who also served. located we will have in this area not only a park and interactive center but also a history and the names and telling of the work that these fine women did. there will be a rose-colored walking path, circled around that park etched with the timeline of all the work that these ladies incredibly performed. along the pathway we will have stopping points where there will be etched stars and the clerk will designate tiles and replicas of many of the famous posters we see today. the park will also have the compass rose that was known to be very famous back in that time at the roosevelt naval base where they would fly from one section to another and that
would be their focal point. adjacent to the compass rose is a quiet garden, a memorial to the women and the men who served in the military. noting the inscription, "all gave some, some gave all." when we think of the rosey, it's also an inspiration to us. i see our speaker who is sitting here tonight. and i think of some of the things i've seen where we really valued what those women did and how they've inspired us today. at this particular location, we will have three flags that will be flown. one will be a u.s. flag that is actually being flown today. we'll have a california flag, and then a local flag as well. i call on my colleagues to take an opportunity to study and reflect and think about all the important stories that made this country so great. and we certainly couldn't leave out the ones in world war ii who began for many of us why we
stand here today. i yield back the balance of my time. the speaker pro tempore: the gentlewoman yields back the balance of her time. ms. ros-lehtinen, florida. mr. grayson, florida. mr. franks, arizona. for what purpose does the gentleman from illinois seek recognition? >> to address the house. the speaker pro tempore: without objection, the gentleman is recognized. >> thank you, madam speaker. madam speaker, it wasn't many years ago that coal miners relied on a small bird, a can narry that signaled that things were toxic.6 c1 bird would become sick before the miners and would have a chance to escape or put on protective respirators. toxic gases, chemicals and natural ion of our resources have jeopardized our air, water and land and wildlife that inhabit the ecosystem. the bird in the coal mine is sick. today, nearly 33% of the species
are threatend and extinction is in the hundreds. losses of these species is from land use change, exploittation and disease. why the emphasis on frogs? they regulate their local ecosystem and control population of insects that spread disease, they are important to our human health as well. they tind the way towards new drugs. scientists have found chemicals that are naturally produced in the skin of various frog species that can kill the h.i.v. virus tools are disappearing. that should tell us something. the frog's skin is relatively thin and permable to water so they are exposed to pollution. their eggs are laid where they absorb chemicals.
they are first in line in an war.onmental pollution a war on the frog is quickly losing. don't heed this call like the miners relied on the bird, we are destined towards unhealth lives. this is already happening across the country. montana is home to the second largest coal plant west of the missouri. one box car of coal is burned every five minutes. the burning coal contains sodium, that willium, mercury and arsenic, which is pumped out of the factory and into the air. the chemicals are caught in the dumped with coal ash. these ponds are shallow artificial lakes of tocksity which leads to wells. sludge flows into the surrounding towns and bubbling
and cracking the floor in local grocery stores. suing the plant for damages, not just water. a scientist said it will cause the extinction of 400 species but it burns on. why? because we have no national energy plan and because there are no current federal forceful regulations. the lack of enforcement which is what led to the disaster in tennessee where a dam failed destroying 300 acres, dozens of homes and killed fish and wildlife. from across the nation, the story is the same. we have no national conservation plan, no national energy policy, no regulatory enforcement powers and the biggest environmental disaster, the horizon deep water
oil spill has not allowed us to pass a cap and trade bill. senator reid said they were sidestepping for oil-response legislation, but we haven't seen that either. it is heartbreaking we must now fight to protect this monumental loss. some in congress are considering weakening this landmark law seeking to bail out polluters who lobby for loopholes that put america's health and safety at risk. we are poisonning our ecosystems, animals and frogs, our families, communities and our nation and our entire world. if we do not heed the bird song, we only have ourselves to blame and by the time we take notice, it may be too late. thank you and i yield back. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman yields back the balance of his time.
serving in the house of and share a few thoughts as i prepare to leave this distinguished body. about this time 34 years ago, my wife and three boys and i were surrounded by scores of well-wishers organized by my friend bob welling as we boarded to travel n missouri to washington, d.c. shortly thereafter, i was sworn into congress. i arrived eager to tackle the problems of the day and the people of the 4th congressional district. it was a highlight for me. gratitude is the greatest of all virt use and i'm grateful to so many people. i'm grateful and appreciatetive to the residents of missouri's 4th congressional district, whose votes allowed me to serve in this representative
house for 34 years. representing the 4th district has been a tremendous privilege. i also want to thank my family who made it possible for me to serve in washington, my late wife, my three wonderful sons and my lovely and understanding wife patty.ve i thank my friends and meantors in congress. i can't name th all, legislateors, congressman dick dick and congressman gephardt and congressman bill emerson who were my car pool partners and great friends. i have enormous respect to help people at home and steer our country's path while performing their constitutional duty. a special thanks to our speaker pelosi for her kindness and
throughout the years. my colleague from missouri had been fantastic. i want to thank my dedicated the past and present, talented people who worked in my missouri office, my washington, d.c. office and small business committee staff and staff on the house armed services committee are the unsung heroes who get government done, i can't thank them enough for being part of my staff and the american people so very well. i have led a charmed life in many ways but as a youngster, i learned that a person's life can change forever in an instant. after contracting polio, i was treatment receive at the warm springs foundation in georgia. polio affects a person's differently but at warm springs, patients learned valuable
life.s in never let illness define you or be limited by the expectations of others, never give up and never stop working. nothing is impossible if you work hard. thousands of warm springs alumni, including myself, have led happy and productive lives. and it is three patients between 1947 and 1950 at warm springs became members of this body. one from new york, georgia and myself. by myg up, i was inspired father's run for statewide office and for congress and also by his service at lafayette county prosecuting attorney and was practicing louisiana when president truman called me to ask me to consider running for congress in 1962.
1976, i decided to run from missouri's 4th congressional district seat and i have been on the ride of my life ever since. it's a great honor to serve in the u.s. house. this house is filled with public servants who work hard who give voice to the voters back home. members of the congress bring their theory of representative democracy to life every time they participate in house time they every listen to the hard wrought concerns of their neighbors. as a member of the house armed services committee, i aspired to become chairman, serving as chairman is deservedly the high point of my political career. to have family members and staff are very special. members of congress lucky enough to serve on this committee worked in a far less partisan atmosphere than on other
committees. article one, section 8, grants congress the obligation to support and raise army. all members approached this work very seriously with protecting our national security and doing what is right for our men and women in uniform and their families. have n politics frequently been tough and tumble. at times, some might even say but national security transcends politics in the realm of national security, we must make the effort to work together in a way to stand before our allies and the world as a united front to strengthen our nation's defenses under the of consensus. as chairman, i have always sought to maintain this atmosphere in the hope that culture has instilled
who served before will carry on under the able leadership of the chair and incoming congress, congressman bud mckeon. i'm confident that it will. throughout our country's history, the nation has experienced many challenges and we have had economic crisis, agricultural hardship, military this ments and members of body responded to each one as they came along. i will always cherish the service here. and men and women with strong principles have met and difficult issues which at the time could render us asundayer, but through meeting in the solving of the problems, our country benefited and was able to progress. as a result of the last election, this center has been
hallowed out and more members will make meaningful compromises difficult if not possible i am. our citizenry will be tested and theoutcome will be in president lincoln's words, any nation so conceived and so dedicated can long endure. when new members arrive at the capitol, they will contront enormous challenges as they work to chart the course of our country in the days ahead. these challenges include the economy and jobs, health care, education, to name a few. our citizens and leaders not to forget that we are a nation at war unless our government protects our national security none of these important issues can receive the attention they deserve. national security must be our
priority. i believe all americans' good troops ns support the and their families and those intentions must be reflected in bears the congress constitutional responsibility to fulfill this duty. migratest concern is that a chasm will develop between those who protect our freedoms and being protected. that is a civil-military gap, a lack of understanding between civilians and the military that has grown in an era of an all-volunteer force. those in uniform and connected to the military, it's easy not to relate to our service members as they deal with the trials of war and combat, multiple deployments, family separations, missed birthdays and other sacrifices too numerous to mention. to narrow that
gap and united we stand and fall.d we the men and women in uniform who form the backbone of our security cannot devote all to protect us if we fail to provide what they need to perform their missions, stay safe in the field and take good care of themselves and their families at home. keeping america safe is a national commitment to maintain military readiness. the united states has been involved in 12 conflicts, some some small. if the future is anything like the past, conflicts, natural disasters and other crises will frequently pop up without warning. preparedness is essential. today's forces are the latest in a long line of sen tinals of freedoms, our soldiers, sailors, air force and marines know the
high service we play on them. will help the next generation to understand that these patriotic volunteers critical to the survival of our nation. we must inspire the next generation to join the nobel service of these ranks. i always consider these young men and women in uniform as a son or daughter. they are national treasures, and their sacrifices will not be taken for granted. they are not chess pieces to be moved about on the board. each and every one is irreplaceable. issues of national security, war and peace are too important to lose sight of the real men and women who answer our nation's call and do the bidding of our commander in chief. you can't do the job as a member of congress for so many years unless you love it and i
do. it's a labor of love. to paraphrase my fellow missourian, harry truman, i've done my damnest every single day and forever be grateful for the trust missourians have placed in me through the years and for the opportunity to serve missouri's fourth congressional district. the u.s. house of representatives and the united states of america. as i leave this house, these lines from alperiod lord tennyson's "ue lit us "express my feelings. much of what i've seen and known, climates, counsels, governments, and my peers, some work of noble note may yet be done. come, my friends, it's not too late to seek a newer world. mr. speaker, thank you for this
time. i yield back. the speaker pro tempore: for what purpose does the gentlelady from california seek recognition? the speaker: mr. chairman, i ask unanimous consent to address the house for a few minutes using the time of mr. garamendi who has this time which he yielded to mr. skelton. the speaker pro tempore: the gentlelady is recognized. the speaker: thank you very much, mr. speaker. mr. speaker, i rise to sing the praises of a great man, ike
skelton, chairman skelton. we all heard his beautiful address to us, and in it he started where his heart is, his family, expressing his love for his family, his appreciation to his staff, his respect for his colleagues, his admiration for our great country. i'm so pleased we've been joined by senator claire mccaskill, coming over from the senate side to make the respect for mr. skelton bicam rell, that we're joined by congresswoman joan emerson, making that support bipartisan as well as so many members of the missouri delegation and that you, mr. carnahan, are in the chair for mr. skelton's presentation. i know we'll be hearing from our distinguished majority leader, mr. hoyer, but i want to note that emanuel cleaver of missouri, lacy clay of missouri
is here, and other members are here, chairman miller, chairs, colleagues, new members, senior members, that's how mr. skelton is regarded and respected in the congress of the united states. he made his speech the way he served in congress, surrounded by friends, admired by all on both sides of the aisle, on both sides of the capitol. he began by talking about his family and he ended by talking about our men and women in uniform which are like sons and daughters to him. he has always taught us that as president kennedy will said, will pay any price, bare any burden. mr. skelton said to us over and over again that protecting american people is our first responsibility. our young men and women in uniform make us the home of the brave and the land of the free and we can never forget that. they have no greater champion
in the congress than the chairman of the armed services committee. i know i speak for every person in this chamber when i say, mr. skelton, thank you for your leadership, for our country. it is an honor to call you colleague. thank you, mr. speaker. >> mr. speaker, mr. speaker. the speaker pro tempore: for what purpose does the gentleman from maryland rise? mr. hoyer: i yield to the gentlelady from missouri. mrs. emerson: thank you, mr. speaker. thank you, mr. majority leader, for allowing me to steal some of your time. but i would be remiss if i didn't try to tell a little bit more of the story that our beloved friend and colleague, ike skelton, started, kind of started all back in 1980 with my family with ike when my late
husband bill and he drove into work every single day, and the stories that i learned both from bill and ike because i used to take ike in after bill and that every thursday now that we come in with prayer breakfast has been for me a remarkable experience because of what i have learned from our colleague, ike skelton, both from history and also an understanding of the great love that he has for our wonderful state of missouri. his commitment and his dedication have been extraordinary, and he has been for me not only a real hero but also someone whom i have tried very hard to learn from. you have set an example, ike,
that is impossible for anybody else to meet, but certainly you have been a role model for me and so many others before me. and i just want you to know how important you are not only to me, to how important you were to bill, to tori and kathryn and to sam and the rest of the kids. but more importantly than that, you have been special for our country. you are what every member of congress should want to be and that is a man of great courage, a man of great fairness. you have had -- you have shown me and others how important it is for us to be civil to one another, how we should talk to one another and i hope that the example that you have set will continue on in this great body.
but you will be sorely missed, and we really love you. i yield back. mr. hoyer: mr. speaker. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman from maryland. mr. hoyer: i ask unanimous consent to speak out of order for one minute. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman is recognized. mr. hoyer: i thank the gentleman. i thank the speaker. mr. speaker, ike skelton is my brother. he and i are both sigma kas. there is misinterpretation about fraternities. it was founded by seven individuals. one of whom was a gentleman named jordan. the jordan standard requires those who pledge that fraternity to live by certain standards. those standards are what we would expect of all of us and hope for all of us.
i have been a member of that fraternity for over half a century. no sigma chi has been more faithful for standard and conduct and fidelity to purpose than my brother, ike skelton. he is the father of a sigma chi and a son of a sigma chi, is that correct, do i have that in order? ike skelton has been a colleague in this congress. ike skelton, as mrs. emerson said and speaker pelosi said and others will say is the quintessential example of what the american public would hope all of us would be. he's thoughtful, great
intellect, faithful, patriotic and he teared, of course, as he mentioned the troops, the men and women who serve this country in uniform. the men and women who have had no greater advocate than ike skelton of missouri. the men and women of our armed forces who have had no greater advocate in terms of not only the quality of their lives, the housing, their health care, their benefits, but also the assurance that they had the best technology that was available to make them not only as effective but as importantly as secure and safe as they could possibly be. ike skelton is a good and decent man who has served his country extraordinarily well.
he quoted the tennyson poem ulysses. he didn't quote the end of it which is essentially that ulysses, then old, the king left his son the duties of being king and brought his band of brothers together to go forth to scribe, to seek, to find and not to yield. there is no doubt in my mind, mr. speaker, that ike skelton will continue to be an extraordinary faithful citizen of this country. an unswerving supporter of those in uniform, of our armed forces and of our national security and one who will uphold the highest standards that this institution would
hope all of its members maintain. and he will continue to strive to seek, to find and we know he will not yield. but on that on principle, he will remain to be courteous and respectful of others as he's been every day on this floor, in his committee and in the hallways of our offices. his late wife was named susan. my oldest daughter is named susan. susan skelton in the spring of 16981 came to bowy -- bowie, maryland, and knocked on doors and the doors opened and she said, i would like you to vote for steny hoyer for congress. i loved susan. we lost susan a few years ago. she was, like her husband, a beautiful, beautiful person. it is a sad day that ike
skelton leaves this chamber. it will not be today but in a few weeks, but it is a wonderful day for all of us to count ourselves blessed by being part of a life of this extraordinary, good and decent man, ike skelton of missouri, ike skelton patriot, ike skelton, a wonderful, great american. thank you, ike skelton. i yield back. the speaker pro tempore: for what purpose does the gentleman from missouri rise? >> mr. chairman, i rise and ask for unanimous consent to address the body for five minutes. the speaker pro tempore: without objection. mr. cleaver: thank you, mr. chairman. mr. chairman, in 2003 i was
teaching at the block school of business at the university of missouri in kansas city serving as a talk radio show host on n.p.r. and pastoring a congregation. . congregation. i received a phone call from congressman ike skelton, who began the request for me to give up my peaceful and loving life to run for congress as my predecessor, karen mccarthy, had decided not to seek re-election. part to pursue
this office at the request of congressman ike settleon. mr. chairman, i have three sisters whom i love dearly. from the age of about three to about seven, i made requests repeatedly to my parents for a brother. i'm not even sure i knew how that brother could come into the ence, but i made request nonetheless. and that never happened. can say here in this chamber, mr. speaker, that if i had a brother, i would like for to have been ike. if i had a brother, i would like
for him to have had the patience, the intellect and the spirit of ike skelton. very little secret around our home who is the favorite congressman for my seven-year-old grandson, issac cleaver. and one of the great delights of his life has already been and he gets, the lder more significant it will be of having introduced congressman ike skelton at an event at royal stadium.
in that introduction he said that ike skelton was named after him. and in our household from my wife diane all the way to little ike, we all have great admiration and love for ike skelton and his family. it will be difficult to roam these halls and not see ike skelton or come into this hallowed room and not look at the seat where he usually sat and where the missouri delegation would from time to time gather around him. i have said to him and to others
in his presence that this man has the ability to walk with kings and presidents and not lose the common touch. as chairman of the armed services committee, ike settleon of the most influential human beings in this country and in the world, the most revered member of congress by the united states military of america. and yet any member of congress and frankly from either side of could stop ike skelton and hold a conversation. lost the common touch. it will be difficult for me not to see him in this place. i speak of the man ike skelton from lexington, missouri, and i
speak of a man whose career in this body will be recorded by historians as a majestic moment for the military of the united states of america. i yield back the balance of my time, mr. speaker, because i think ike skelton deserves far than i can ce present and hopefully a combination of everything we say will match in some small way the served inith which he congress. the speaker pro tempore: for what purpose does the gentleman from connecticut rise snr to honor a fellow colleague, a person -- the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman is recognized for five minutes by unanimous consent. speak out of k to order for five minutes to honor our distinguished colleague from
the show me state. coming into this congress and the first committee i was appointed to serve on was the armed services committee. and to be there under the guidance of ike skelton. i was the last person appointed to the committee that year. and in fact, my mother would to me, how come i never see you on c-span? and that was because i was sitting behind the camera so they couldn't actually see me on c-span. but ike settleon, as he does with everyone, treated the memo the committee, which was me with the same kind of
respect and solid visas he does every member of this chamber. ike skeleton as has been -- ike skelton as has been said, cares so deeply for his home state, for his community, for his great family and legacy. imagine in this chamber sitting and serving with a direct descend ent of daniel boone and knowing how proud he was of that legacy, how proud growing up in his great state he was much his dad when he learned about in so many conversations with him and about harry truman and the great
history of missouri. but until you go there to lafayette and travel and stay at his home as steny mentioned with his wonderful wife susie, who was such a kind and generous and kindred soul mate of ike's and to walk around that district and see the respect and the reference -- receive advance that the people had for ike skelton. know a great deal about ethanol, but by gentleladyy, by i was through, you would have thought i was an expert at it. and to travel with this man
abroad to see the respect at our war colleges amongst our military leaders, amongst heads of state, but most important to him, the men and women who wear of this country. he carriers his legacy, his great family name, his state, and his country. he wears that well on his face. he shoulders it well, but he carries in his heart a love and men and women who serve this great country of ours. and everything he has done on
this great floor has been on their behalf. all men and women who serve in our armed forces owe such a great debt of gratitude to this humble, passionate servant of our country and the proud bearer of his great state of missouri in the way that he has held for on behalf he's sworn to serve and the men and women that have represented this great country of ours and given the their devotion. like so many here, i love ike skelton. he is a man of the house, a man
for the ages, because he led with that big heart of his and cared so deeply. god bless you, ike skelton. we are all better for having served with you. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman from missouri is recognized. mr. clay: i'm here to thank ike skelton for his friendship, for his service to this country and especially for his friendship to me. with ike skelton goes back more than 30 years.
a teenager when i first met him because he served with my father, both representing the missouri and i can remember the day he arrived here . and happened to wind up serving in the state legislature for 17 his district in jefferson city. and so our paths would cross on occasion. but, ladies and gentlemen, this country will never witness an individual like ike skelton. they'll never be another one like him to cast a shadow on this floor. you have served this country and your state well and you have also given me a greater
appreciation for our armed services, the men and women who some make the ultimate sacrifice of this country. as reverend cleaver and others have said, i have also visited lafayette and i have also been to the military bases with ike to air force bases where they house the b-1 and he has been my compass in this house on military issues. and he's also been, as reverend cleaver has said, a brother to me. i had two sisters, too, ike. i never had a brother, but if i could ever identify as a brother, it would be you.
and i know i will miss you. i will miss your guidance. i will miss your mentoring. and we have truly witnessed a legislative giant in our midst. job. ve done your you have done it quite well. won't be the last time that we see each other , and i know that you will frequently visit us. but for the missouri delegation, you were there for all of us. he was the senior member of the missouri delegation. and never hesitated to call us together. and we have so much cohesion as a state because of his leadership. and i appreciate that, ike. i appreciate what you have --
how you have taken me under your wing and given me guidance here. and i love you for it for the rest of my life. and as the saying goes, old soldiers never die, they just won't be but you fading too far. i love you, ike skelton. and god bless you and god bless the united states. the speaker pro tempore: without objection, the gentleman from texas is recognized. >> thank you, mr. speaker. it is a privilege and an honor to be here this evening to honor a great american. i have had the privilege of traveling throughout the world with chairman ike skelton. one of my first trips was with
ike skelton. mr. reyes: we went to the far east, we had thanksgiving with our troops at the d.m.z. in south korea. subsequent to that we also took a trip to bosnia several times, spent one easter with the troops . so many memories of trips to visit the troops and their families, to look at the facilities, to make sure they had all the equipment that they needed to have, all of the support that we could possibly have enabled to give them on the committee. i've had the privilege and honor of visiting ike's district in missouri and i invited chairman skelton to come to el paso. i grew up in a little town right
outside of el paso. the main street of this little town was donovan drive. never did i dream that i had grown up in this environment with a direct connection to missouri. because when ike skelton came to my district, he immediately recognized the connection. he said, this street was named after colonel alexander donovan who is a missourian, who was a missourian, came to texas to save texas. immediately a connection there. chairman ike skelton is in my eyes a professor of history, a professor of particularly military history. we all famously have a list of
recommended readings from chairman ike skelton. i have to confess i haven't read all those books yet, but i am working on it. it makes you -- it gives you a better understanding, but for me it gives me a unique perspective on who the man ike skelton is and i couldn't agree more with my colleagues here this evening in paying tribute to a great american. a giant that has served this institution with dignity, with honor, with great passion and with great love and care for our military men and women and for their families. ike, it's been a tremendous honor to serve with you. i've learned so much from you that i think by any measure if there is any -- a new member coming here, my recommendation would be, emulate the great chairman ike skelton.
thank you. and thanks to the people of missouri for sharing you for over three decades of great public service to this great country. for me, an honor, for this country, an american legend. thank you, ike, god bless you and god bless this country. the speaker pro tempore: for what purpose does the gentleman from missouri rise? >> i ask unanimous consent to address the house for five minutes. the speaker pro tempore: without objection. >> mr. chairman, i just want to add my voice to these remarks this evening about our friend and colleague, ike skelton. of missouri. he first came to this congress in 1976, with my predecessor, congressman gephardt. that was the first year i voted, in 1976. i was a senior in high school that year and to watch him grow
in leadership, to become what i believe is really a national treasure. mr. carnahan: his voice advocating for american troops and their families, his leadership on national readiness for current conflicts and future conflicts that we may face is really -- has really been unparalleled. we respect his leadership and what he has done for the strength of this country. in missouri he has been a leader, he has been the dean of our delegation, i had the honor to work with him, also had the honor to travel with him, to visit our troops in kosovo and wrells. and we've seen what he's done to transform -- elsewhere. and we've seen what he's done to transform two vital military facilities in missouri, whiteman air force base and fort leonardwood, to become what they are today. he's not only a student of history, but he has been a great
teacher and a great mentor. he's been a family friend. it has been an honor and a privilege to serve with him, to call him colleague, but also to see his example for public service. he has been a model for what public service is all about. i know that he has several chanters left to write -- chapters left to write for what he does to give back to this country and our great state and we look forward to seeing those for years to come. best wishes to you, my friend. the speaker pro tempore: for what purpose does the gentlewoman from california rise? >> to address the house for five minutes. the speaker pro tempore: without objection. >> order of out.
thank you -- out of order. thank you. i rise today to say thank you. thank you to ike for being such a great mentor. for taking me under your wing, for telling me how -- a little bit about what it was like for you when you chaired the personnel committee. a number of years ago. and i think you told me that early on when i came onto the armed services committee, but it was a few years later when i actually had the great honor of chairing that subcommittee. mrs. davis: and then i felt such an incredible burden because i thought, you know, ike has done this before and how could i live up to who he had been and the way he had cared for the troops and their families? kind of got through some of the really tough times because when you deal with those issues you know that you're going to be, you know, looking -- wanting to do everything in the world when you can't, when there are limits
to what you can do. and i just -- i really remember you telling me about that and just, you know, letting me know, get in there. but you better do a good job. i want you to do a good job. i don't want you to screw it up. so i certainly had that burden, but more than anything else, ike, you are such a splendid gentleman and, you know, we use the word kind of loosely here. sometimes i think we often say to the gentleman from whatever state that might be, you are the gentleman. i mean, you are the epitome of what we all believe to be someone who serves in this very, very body and who cares so deeply and has such strong principles and who teaches us all and i think we all want to live up to that standard that
you set. it's not easy and you made it really hard for everybody to do that. but i think we all strive for that as best we can. i know that -- i didn't have an opportunity to be in your district, but you came to my district. and you and your late wife were there and we had just the most marvelous evening and i remember that i was then at an event that you spoke at and i remember looking around the room and everybody was just, you know, transfixed really on your words. you were telling one of those stories and it went on forever, but that didn't seem to bother anybody. they were just delighted to be in your company. and to hear you speak and to hear the way you interacted with all the people in the room, but telling those stories, president truman of course came into that story and your father and i have just enjoyed serving with you. i can't tell you how much i'm
going to miss you. it's going to be a lot. and i know you're going to miss everybody here as well. but we are all so much better for having served with you. thank you. the speaker pro tempore: for what purpose does the gentleman from california -- from pennsylvania rise? >> i ask unanimous consent to address the house for five minutes. the speaker pro tempore: without objection. >> thank you, mr. speaker. what does a irish pennsylvania boy have to do with ike skelton? standing up here and talking? actually, i have roots in missouri, in farmington my ancestors started the first sunday school west of the mississippi. in missouri. that was a little story i told ike, i don't know if you remember that. but it comes from times that ike and i traveled together on congressional delegation trips. he had asked me to travel with him to afghanistan and iraq at thanksgiving. we did that twice.
giving up time with our families, but traveling out there to be with the soldiers. i think they metropolitan a lot to the soldiers -- meant a lot to the soldiers who were sacrificing so much to our country. i thought it was pretty amazing that here was this gentleman, in the truest sense of the word, being willing to give up his holidays with the family to be over there. i was pleased and honored to go with him. we had some interesting times. we knew general petraeus and general mcchrystal, the ins and outs of what's wheags going on in a war zone, talking to the soldiers about the stresses they face. and i know for me i learned a great deal from them but also learned a great deal from my friend, congressman skelton, about the ins and outs of what takes place in military, through his chairmanship and ranking membership, of what he's learned from the house armed services committee. but it's also things you learn about a person under times of stress.
ike and i have the dubious distinction of being the only two members of congress ever injured in iraq. and it happened on a dark night, we were traveling after having met, i believe, with general casey, on a road back to the baghdad airport, when this mini bus we were traveling in, referred to affectionately as an ice cream truck, hit something, we heard a boom, up in the air, bounce, rolled over. both of us slid inside the interior. i was injured a bit, that doesn't matter. ike had his own symptoms. and a lot of chaos occurred at that moment and we learned what happens on a military site when there's an injury that occurs, that soldiers swarming around, securing the perimeter, ambulances arriving, trying to take care of both ike and i at that moment. incredible, incredible debtcation and skill of these soldiers. we intended to visit a hospital but not in a horizontal position. what occurred afterwards, taking us in an ambulance, and we're
both in some pain, not to -- nothing compared to what our soldiers face, but an interesting thing happened with one of the staffers at that point, aaron. reached in and patted my toe and said, you know, i'll pray for you. the ambulance door closed and ike, always a man of good humor, said, what am i, chopped liver? what's wrong here? no one's going to pray for me? he had issues, too. we went to a hospital then in baghdad, some difficult moments, hearing the cries of a young boy whose room was near ours who we understand his parents had just been killed and he was hurt, too. then traveling over to balad where our soldiers who were wounded pretty severely were all being prepped to take to germany. and to see what takes place with people -- as people were some pretty severe injuries were prepared, sometimes on basically a traveling intensive care unit, with doctors and nurses around
them, and ike and i and our helicopter trip over there, and having our moments where you're lying on this litter, on the same helicopter that carries so message of our wounded soldiers, it gives you something to think about. and then traveling over to germany on this big c.17 for several hours. but now and then i would hear this voice coming from either above mother owe below me, wherever -- above me or below me, the voice of ike saying, well, what do you think about this? we certainly are learning something here. always just that little bit of humor. and putting that little bit of perspective on it, in otherwise a pretty stressful situation. not only what was happening to us but being around all these wounded and doctors and nurses doing so much. i'm sure ike has lots of variations on the story he tells but what is important here is that after we came back, he had of course made sure that that one staffer who tapped my toe and said, i'll pray for you, understood that he wanted prayers too and it was some time after that, i believe that what
you received was probably a note that a mass was being said for you by the pope. you certainly outranked me on what was happening there. but it was his humor, it's his knowledge, it's his incredible class. a lot of times americans may hear criticisms of members of congress, and you may hear the bipartisan or attacks on each other which is hard by bipartisan. that makes the evening news. when people call each other names, when they insult each other. mr. murphy: when they play political games, that's going to make the front pages. what you don't hear about is the genuine friendships and respect we have for each other. let me tell you, ike, i can't think of anybody in this house that i have more friendship and respect for than what you've taught me. with more friendship. the people of missouri have to be proud and i'm proud to have to serve with you, a man i can always call my
friend. god bless you. and i yield back. the speaker pro tempore: for the purpose does gentlewoman from new hampshire rise? no objection. ms. shea-porter: there is a button from an old presidential case that says i like ike. in this case, i love ike. i arrived in the house four years ago and i met ike skelton and recognized immediately that friend of the generals and a friend of the powerful, he was a friend to had the great pleasure of traveling to him and i saw the way he treated some very, very young soldiers and having been married to a young my life, i ime in recognized how overwhelming it was when anybody above the rank of sergeant spoke and here was the chairman of the armed services committee bending over to get words of advice from the
young men and women of this country who serve us. and it's true that you are an incredible scholar, historian. if ike says it is so, it is so and he often told us what was so and he gave us lists to read and things we should know and he was always right. traveled with him abroad, the respect that we all received because we were with ike skelton. it was impressive and overwhelming. and so to say good-bye is extremely painful, but what we need to do is celebrate the great gift you gave this you, your he gift of time, your knowledge, your experience, your wisdom and the of the world views you is the way we view you, with respect, admiration and love. thank you very much for your service. the speaker pro tempore: for what purpose does the
gentlewoman from california rise? no objection. you, mr. z: thank garamendi. to our chairman, ike skelton, thank you. thank you very much. sitting for earned 14 years, my full-time here on this committee has been invaluable and you were the first one to ask me to go on a congressional delegation and before some of the world leaders and first to tell me about what it was to be in the military and all the information you gave me, learn the ranks, learn what the stars mean, just all the very beginning when i ion 14 years ago got to the committee, i cannot say enough, ike. i really can't. aside from being somebody who has loved the troops and you
have and i have seen that just as my colleagues ms. davis have seen that from you, aside from really being the champion for the troops and that's how i'llals remember you, you are a congress person's congress person. we model ourselves after. and ike, from the bottom of my we will miss you. thank you. thank you for all the memories, for all the learning and in particular, for taking some of the women on the committee under your arm and showing us what it is to serve proudly on the house armed services committee. thank you, mr. chairman. i yield back. the speaker pro tempore: for what purpose does the gentleman from mississippi rise? mr. taylor: i ask unanimous forent to address the house five minutes. the speaker pro tempore: no objection.
mr. aiken i thank for allowing us to go into your time a little bit, a fellow congressman from missouri. mr. speaker, i have a vietnamese a rican friend who has limited use of the english also very devout and saw him at his boat yard. and having a limited use of the english language and being devout, he did not use the kind of words i would use in that situation, he just shouted over and over, no joy. is a no joy moment. but for those of us who have had the privilege of working with ike, if you are the mother or father of a marine, sailor, you
skelton.ow ike in our line of work, if you do something stupid, you are a headline. if you do the right thing, people don't know your name. if your child has been saved because of a mine resistance should know ike skelton's name. if you are a military retirey who is enjoying the benefits of tricare for life, you should know ike skelton's name. if you are a guardsmen or reserveist who is now eligible tricare, you should ike skelton's name. what he won't ever tell you, out of concern for his kids, he has
two sons who are officersn the united states military, but what every mom and dad should know is that there was one more parent out there looking out for their kid and that was ike skelton. for all of those things and for your great humility, i got to tell the story. ike visited the coast guard buoy tender and paid his respects to the captain, engineering officer, but then he sought out the lowest-ranked person on that boat and went back to him and said, i'm ike skelton, i'm a congressman from missouri. have you ever had a congressman on your fleet tender before?
he said no, and i hope i never do again. i have been working my butt off. only ike skelton would tell that story. the rest of america knows and i hope that apprentice made chief. ike, you have been an incredible role model, someone who put $600 billion bill that involves the lives of airmen, marines, sailors, to some troops in the field and passed out of your committee unanimously. that is an incredible feat. and all of us are grateful for your service. god bless you. the speaker pro tempore: for what purpose does the gentleman from california rise? mr. garamendi: request permission to address the
remaining hour here. it was 13 months ago that i was privilege of becoming a member of the congress. and seven months ago that i was given the other privilege of a member of the armed services committee. for the last hour and 10 minutes, queff heard from chairman skelton and from his colleagues that have expressed their appreciation based upon that knowledge and their working with an extraordinary man. i feel cheated. i don't have all of those years that my other colleagues have had to learn and to share time chairman skelton, my seven months have been too short. in those seven months, i have found the opportunity for
friendship, brootshood and the opportunity to work and to be mentored by an incredible individual. hat you have seen here tonight is the outpouring of emotion and respect for a gentleman that has served this nation and the armed services for 34 years in the capacity of a member of congress. that's an incredible record. months of that i have had a personal experience and i value those moments intensely. i have had my hours on the floor talking about policy. i have not had such an important hour as this hour listening to the members of this congress speak of one of their colleagues. it's been a very good hour. chairman skelton, you are loved,
loved for very good reason. you are a unique individual. i yield back my time. thank you, mr. speaker. the speaker pro tempore: for the gentleman es from missouri rise? mr. akin: i would request permission to address for one minute. the speaker pro tempore: no objection. mr. akin: thank you, mr. speaker. i also wanted to add my note to the already numerous congratulations and praises for chairman skelton. i have served my 10 years in congress on the armed services committee. i told him last night at a re night before last at a reception that i thought ike was like my big brother down here. and you know, sometimes as we go on codels in the field and we can talk to different level officers, sometimes it's a sergeant, sometimes a general, sometimes in between, we get
sometimes nswers and a well placed question to the right person is very helpful. i'm a republican and sometimes a well placed question to a democrat is the great thing to do. i will ask, what do you think? he said it would be a good thing if you can get it done. he is a big brother to everybody down here and he runs the committee the way i understand itsed to be done, where the objective is to deal with the country and that is the business of the committee. and so i thank you very much for work down here. we're going to miss you a lot, mr. chairman, mr. marine and my big brother. god bless you and god speed. the speaker pro tempore: for what purpose does the gentleman from colorado rise? >> i send to the desk a privileged report for filing
under the rule. the speaker pro tempore: report will the title. the clerk: resolution providing for consideration of the senate amendment to the bill h.r. 4853 to amend the internal revenue 1986 to sten the funding and expenditure of the airway and airport trust fund and amend title 49 united states code to extend authorizes and for other providing for motions to suspend the rules. for eaker pro tempore: what purpose does the gentleman from colorado rise? >> i ask unanimous consent to for one he house minute. i rise today to honor my departing colleague representative ike skelton. i did not work closely with representative skelton. there was one day, my sister who had been working for the was part of the q. d.r.
team and the chairman invited me up to the podium to be there and honor and i at would like to say despite his political views in other areas, i never sensed that he treated me any differently because of my sexual ownertation and he fully respected me as a member of this body and it was those small things and courtesies he showed me that made him stand up as a missed and ill be will only be a short period of time until his name shows up on a aircraft carrier and i yield back. the speaker pro tempore: the chair lays before the house an enrolled bill. the clerk: h.r. 6162, an act to provide research and development authority for alternative to the material secretary of the treasury, increase congressional oversight
and ensure the continuity of numerous items. under ker pro tempore: the speaker's announced policy of january 6, 2009, the gentleman from missouri, mr. achein, is recognize -- mr. akin is recognized for 60 minutes as the diss egg knee of the minority leader. . mr. akin: thank you, madam chair. i appreciate the opportunity to join you and my colleagues tonight in a discussion that has been very much in the attention of people now for a number of years. and something that, because it is so important, it has maintained the attention politically for many, many months. and that is the condition of our economy and indeed the condition
of the world economy as well. and now this might seem like kind of an he is owe teric topic, but it -- esoteric topic, but it affects americans all over this great land and the main effect is that people don't have jobs. when you don't have jobs, things don't go so well. the american nation was founded by many, many courageous people over a period of hundreds of years. and they came to this land with dreams in their hearts. an idea to try something out. an idea to test their abilities, to make something that had not been made before, do something that had not been done before. and so they came. initially i talked a couple of weeks ago about that brave band of mothers and fathers and kids that he can call the pilgrims -- that we call the pilgrims. they came to this land with a dream of starting a new nation.
and in the first few months, half of them died almost, just slightly under half. and yet when the mayflower left flimoth harbor, those people had had that dream in their heart stayed because they beeved that this could be a special and a unique nation and they saw themselves as governor bradford wrote, as stepping stones to others who were coming to found a new nation. starting with that little group and with others even before them at jamestown, you have people like thomas edison. he had the idea that he'd make a light bulb and so he made 100 different light bulbs, all of them failures. and his attitude was, well, now i know 100 ways not to make a light bulb. and so it was that america, with all of these courageous people that had that perseverance and that grit, one person at a time started building this nation. one dream at a time. it became such a common thing, we gave it a name, we called it
the american dream. a dream was to be able to come here with barely the shirt on your back and end up in much better condition than when you started. and so the condition we find ourselves in with unemployment high and the economic conditions difficult is something that we should view as not very consistent with our past or what we expect from this country or the standards that we would hold up. and the condition of the economy is one of those things that, if you look at it from a math catcal point of view, there are -- mathematical point of view, there are principles that govern how things work. if you violate those principles there's bad results. but if you keep to the principles you do pretty well. unfortunately over the last number of years and with both republican and democrat, sometimes at the hell -- democrat sometimes at the het am, we have violated some basic
principles and now we're starting to see the fruit of that at a high level of unemployment. now, i have here a little cartoon, this is the president and he's wanting to know, how come you're not hiring people? you have coming into the china shop a couple of triple bulls here, the health care reform and the cap and trade or cap and tax bill and the war tax and this poor guy that's got the china shop is looking a little bit worried and because this is a nice cartoon, but the point of the matter is there's things that we can do which are going to make it very hard to create jobs. now, if you were to try to categorize those things, and i've had a chance to go to my district and to st. louis and st. charles area in missouri and talk to many smearl small businessmen, medium sized businessmen, but people from across the nation too here in washington, d.c., if you ask them this question, people who are in the business world, what are the ways that you can make sure you're going to kill jobs? maybe this is a reverse way of looking at it, i appall polyjies
for that, but there's a -- i apologize for that, but there's a reason why i'm approaching it this way. what are the things to do if you want to make sure there's not going to be jobs for people? well, i think about the first thing usually and i don't know that these are necessarily exactly in the right order, but certainly this first one is the one that comes to the mind of most people. if you ask them, what are you going to do if you want to kill jobs, and the first thing they think of is excessive taxation. now, that might seem kind of theoretical but it shouldn't be any surprise to us. if you picture yourself with a lemonade stand or making some other kind of product and you figure out how much it costs you to buy your raw materials, you have maybe a lemonade machine so you got to put the lemons in it, you got sugar that you got to buy, got solve some good water, kind of an ice maker, so you put that altogether, you figure out what it's going to cost you to make some lemonade, you look at the cost of the ingredients and people come and buy it on the
hot day. so they're buying the lemonade and you're making -- there's a difference between what it costs you and what you can sell it for. so you make a profit. and that's basically the lemonade stand idea. not complicated. but if the government comes along and taxes every glass of lemonade that goes out, it makes it a little harder to try to make a living. what happens if the government raises the tax too much on your lemonade? well, then nobody will buy it and now you're out of business. and so this isn't a very complicated idea that if you do too much taxation on a business, either the business sort of hiber nates and tries to weather the storm or they just actually plain go out of business and you kill the potential for creating any new jobs as well as getting rid of old ones. so excessive taxation is usually at the top of a lot of business people's things, if you want to kill jobs. another one and this sounds like a big thing, insufficient liquidity. what that is that's saying is
businessmen need to borrow money at various times and they have to get the loans from banks and if the bank policy is such that the businessman has trouble getting a loan, then it makes it harder for him or her to expand their business. in the current conditions of what we're dealing with, you find that a lot of federal regulators are all over the banks and telling the banks to be very, very careful about any loans they may -- make and they have to have a tremendous amount of security to make sure that they can even have that loan on their books. and so depending particularly on federal regulatory toward banks, the liquidity is a big deal and in our time right now that liquidity is very tight. we also, of course, and we're going to be talking about that tonight, it's really the subject of our talk, and that is taxation. what we do about the largest tax increase in history that's coming down the pike, the beginning of next year, that's the question. but i want to put it in the
context of jobs, because tax increases may sound theoretical, but having a place to work, being able to pay your mortgage, being able to put food on the table for your kids, those are very real things for americans. the stress of being a good citizen, wanting to take care of your family, and not being able to do that just puts a horrible stress on families and on americans all over and it's not the right thing and it's because we in congress have not done the right thing. so we've got -- these are some jobs killers, excessive taxation, lower liquidity. economic uncertainty. that might not seem to be -- is that really such a big deal? well, it really is. if you own a business, every day, every week, every year you're in business to a degree is a gamble. you're gambling that you can keep your cost of making a product lower than what you can sell it for. but what happens if you're not quite sure wleas going on with
the economy? you're not sure whether anybody wants to buy your product at all next month and you've got a whole lot of cost coming along, how do you figure that out? well, each businessman has to live in that area of taking risks. but you're not going to take many risks if it seems like every time you turn around there's something you weren't expecting that's coming and whacking you upside the head. something that's affecting your business, making it harder for you to operate and so if there's uncertainty, that's one of the things that's going to guarantee that a business owner is going to hunker down and wait for better times. so economic uncertainty is a very big factor in employment or unemployment. the other one here is i guess pretty self-evident and that's government red tape. and government mandates. obviously you have a lemonade stand and you've got your equipment and you understand what the taxes are going to be, but all of a sudden somebody comes up and says, are those glasses you're using clean
enough? have they been government certified with -- we put them in the dish washer, that's not good enough, you have to turn in this and this and this report. have you done this? have you done that? all of these things may not affect your product at all, but it sure affects the cost of doing business because you have to hire an accountant to keep up with all the red tape that the government lays on you. so red tape and regulations and main dates, particularly difficult for small businesses because they don't have lots of employees so they can just designate one person to cover it. it takes a whole lot of the owner of the business' time. so awful these things are job killers and unfortunately i've left one off the list, unfortunately in every one of these areas, the last number of years, we've been doing exactly these things. week been killing jobs. week of been doing all of these things in spades. the last one is excessive government spending. you put that package of five together and i don't care what the chairman of the fed does or
what people want to say about the wall street, the facts of the matter are, you do these five things and do you them aggressively and you will see jobs being scarce and actually going away. currently, supposedly, the unemployment rate is 10% is it really 10%? no, it's worse than that. if you haven't had a job for a certain number of months they take you off the list. they say, oh, you don't count anymore. but there are a lot of people who haven't had a job for a lightning time, they're not considered un-- a long time, they're not considered unemployed, so they're not part of that 10% unemployed number. the real number is higher than what the government pubs. all of those things, though, are largely the result of policies made by congress, made by our president, that are job killers. and we have to turn this around if we really want to see the economy turn back and return to some version of normal and for the american dream to work.
now, obviously in the political world there are different theories about what you should do in government and what would work and during the days of f.d.r. there was a theory that became quite popular. it was proposed by little lord keynes but also another person who was involved in that was henry morgenthau and the theory was that if the economy were not doing well, if the government would just spend a whole lot of money, the money that the government spent would buy stuff, get people buying things and get the economy going and therefore by the government spending money, you could solve the problem of a recession. it was the sort of siren call to people in politics because it sounded like a good deal. you just spend a whole lot of money which makes you popular because you get to spend money on all kinds of pet projects and then the economy's going to turn around, you're going to do better. that was the theory. the problem is that the theory never worked. never did work.
and it's never going to work in the future because it defies the basic laws of economics. now, in my state we talk a little bit about common sense, the people of missouri i don't think would buy this theory that the way to get out of economic trouble is to spend a whole lot of money. in fact, i think they would look at it like you grab your boot straps and lift up and try to fly around the room. if you were the head of a family and you came home to your family and said one night, hey, we have all kinds of credit card bills and we've overspent the budget and things are not looking good, i don't have a job anymore and, you know, what are we going to do for the family budget? and somebody proposes, well, hey, let's go spend a whole lot of money. people would think you were nuts, they'd put you in a funny little jacket there if you did that. well, this is what henry morgenthau, henry morgenthau was f.d.r.'s treasury secretary. and so they just -- they tried this little scheme and at the end of about eight or nine
years, before the ways and means committee -- this is as late as 1939, henry morgenthau says, we have tried spending money, we're spending more than we've ever spent before and it does not work. now, we just passed that supposed stimulus bill and we were told it was going to work. we knew it wasn't going to work because we knew henry morgenthau knew it wouldn't work. it never worked in the past but we had to try it again. and we tried that last year and guess what? it just does not work. in any sense, i say, after eight years of the administration, we have just as much unemployment as when we started and an enormous debt to boot. what they had also done, which he does not mention, they had taxed businesses to the point that the businesses closed and it takes time to open a new business and start a new business and get it going. so we were able to turn a
recession into the great depression. we should learn from the people that went before us. and particularly i believe the democrats should pay attention to this democrat secretary of treasury that worked for f.d.r. because he told us in 1939, it would not work. and what are we doing? we're spending money at the federal level at a rate unlike anything we've seen before. the budget this year is about the same in terms of deficit as last year. people said of president bush that he spent too much money. perhaps he did when the -- when he was president and speaker pelosi was speaker, he had his worst year of spending about $450 billion of deficit. that's not good. but the deficit in twine was $1.3 trillion. it looks like it's close to
$1.3 trillion for 2010. that's three times worse than the bush years. and we should be learning. it just does not work. we can't continue to spend money and think we're going to deal with the problems of unemployment. in fact, we're making it worse. now one of the things that the bush administration did that was smart and that was right, they learned from previous presidents. they learned that when you're in a recession, what you need to do is get off of taxation, you want to reduce taxation. they learned that not only from ronald reagan, they learned it from j.f.k. j.f.k. is a democrat. i wish the democrats learned from j.f.k. he understood, cut taxes when you've got a recession going on. we had a recession when i first came to congress in 2001, started in 2000, 2001, 2002, the economy was not good. and president bush understood that you needed to cut taxes he
told people that. we were able to cut taxes. so in 2003, particularly, we cut three taxes that were very, very important. we're going to look at the result of that in a moment. but he understood that. when we cut the taxes, what happened was the economy spun around and we had a number of good years until we turned back around and started getting into more taxes again. the taxes we cut are all tissue these tax cuts are going to expire next year. a lot of people are talking about, what are we going to do with this huge tax increase coming on top of us in the beginning of next year? are we going to make the bush tax cuts permanent? are we going to extend the bush tax cuts? are we going to talk about it and do nothing? what's going to happen here? ordinary income, these are the top rate increases, from 35% to
40%. capital gains goes from 15% to 20%. qualified dividends, 15% to almost 40%. and particularly the death tax, probably one of the most insidious, one of the most unfair and one of the most rid are clouse of our taxes, gos from 0% to 55%. that's a killer of a lot of small businesses that have not protected themselves against these tax increases that are coming up. there are some other different ancillary tax increases coming. the bottom line is it's the biggest tax increase in the history of the country. when is it coming in when the economy is weak and unemployment is high. s that formula for disaster. we're going to talk about why that's so bad and why we must do something and the thing we have to do is make those bush tax cuts permanent if we want to deal, unless we want a worse level of unemployment.
i'm joined by my good friend, congressman scalise, and i would yield. mr. scalise: thank you. i want to thank my friend from missouri for hosting this hour and focusing on this important issue and of course at a time when we're just weeks away from facing what would be the largest tax increase in the history of our country, we have been pushing to make the current tax rit ares permanent to prevent to stave off what would be the large, massive job-killing tax increase that's pending on january 1 if no action is taken. unfortunately, the liberal leadership that's running this congress right now will not address this issue in a proper way that ends that uncertainty. when you lookut there, throughout the country, when we talk to small businesses in our districts and all throughout the country so many companies would like to hire, would like to make investment, even in these tough economic times but because of the uncertainty
created by the threat of these massive tax increases, it is holding back the economy. it's holding back the ability for these companies to make that investment and to create those good jobs. and it's so unfortunate because we're at a point where there should be, and there is, i think, bipartisan agreement that especially now in tough economic times, you shouldn't raise taxes on anybody. especially those small business owners who create the bulk of our jobs in this country. that's exactly what they're facing. that's exactly what you're hearing from the people who say they can't make decisions, they can't make those investments because they're look out and seeing that if congress takes no action or tries to play crass warfare, which would be even worse, try to pick winners and losers and say, some people will see a tax increase and some aren't, what a bad message that sends to those people that are trying to get the economy back on track and what's so sad
about all this is history tells us, history tells us, whether you go back to john f. kennedy, ronald reagan, you can go to president bush, when taxes were cult, especially when you did aggressive tax cuts, not only did you see job growth you saw a tremendous amount of money, billions of dollars more, coming into the federal government which goes against the myth othat's out there, the president and others say we can't afford to cut taxes. well, i think we can't afford not to keep the current tax rates. we surely can't afford a tax increase. but hist arery tells us, history tells us, any administration you look at, you can go to 1920, to the 1960's, the 1980's, 2003, when taxes are cut, job creation follows and more money follows and flows into the federal government. the reason we get deficits is because congress, both republican and democrat have spent too much money.
the deficits come because we spend too much money. so the formula that's always proven to be successful and the formula we should be following right now is cut taxes, make sure nobody's taxes go up and control spending at the same time, that whey you not only stop get manager deficit spending but get on a path to balance the federal budget which is what we need to do. mr. akin: i'm delighted you made those points. i have some charts here that have been kicking around my office for four or five year, i'm glad to be able to dust them off and just on the very points you're making, because you're so absolutely correct, it almost seems to me that somehow president obama and the other leadership here in congress has forgotten some amazingly simple thing bus we make life too complicated sometimes. one thing is, the american dream was not to make rich
people poor. the american dream was about making people that didn't have much money to be richer. sometimes richer economically, sometimes because they come here without a high school education and watch their kids pick up the college diploma. there's a lot of ways that that american dream works. but it was never to tear people down. it was always to build people up. that seems like kind of a basic idea. but it seems like the focus is, we're so worried about somebody being rich, we're willing to melt the economy down just to try to get them. the funny thing is, people who are very rich have ways of hiding their money and all you do is hurt a lot of innocent people. the other thing that seems simple to me if you're honestly worried about unemployment and jobs, it seems like the obvious thing is, jobs come from employers. if you destroy employers, how will you have jobs? that's not -- in missouri we say that's a no-brainer, yet
somehow here in washington, d.c. we make that too complicated. we've got a tremendous level of federal spending, bury people in red tape, mess with their liquidity, create uncertainty in the market, spend money like mad, tax these businesses career ate uncertainty and wonder why there aren't any jobs. it doesn't seem like it's that complicated an issue. getting back to what you said, my good friend, right here, this is may, 2003, and there were a series of tax cuts that happened right here in may of 2003, the tax cuts was capital gains dividends and the death tax. those are not really popular taxes, when the republicans passed them, we were criticized, trying to do special deals were rich people. and the question is when we cut these taxes, the liberals are saying, well, you've spent all this money because if you cut the taxes you won't get this
revenue that comes in, therefore those tax cuts will cost the government this much money. and that was their reasoning. their mindset is, the government owns everything and we're going to let the people who work keep a little bit of it. we did this tax cut even though it wasn't popular in may of 2003. and this talks about job creation. i started, congressman, on the subject of jobs. this is the job creation before and after taxes and anything that's going down means we lost jobs. any line that goes up says we gained jobs. here's the tax cut here. look at this. look at this graph. of the jobs. job creation. that says that something is going on at this point. why would that be the tax cut make jobs? because you let the businessman keep more of what he owns. in terms of job creation, these taxes had a very beneficial
effect. what happens if we reverse this? what happens if we go from here? right here we have a lot of un-- a lot of unemployment. what happens in the time of unemployment if we reverse this effect -- this effect? it's going to be the same process but backwards. we're going to take jobs that existed and destroy them. are we in a position with 10% or more unemployment to turn around and destroy more jobs? that seems like a definition of unsin -- of insanity. these are month by month, year by year, this is what happens after this tax cut and this is the job effect and i'll allow you to dement on it if you want, i've got two other interesting charts here, not just jobs but gross domestic product and your last point, which was government revenues, quite interesting. i yield. mr. scalise: i thank the gentleman for yielding. the chart you just showed really lays out in a very good
graphical form what really does happen when you cut taxes. unfortunately, you don't hear this on the mainstream media. it's something a lot of pundits try to ignore, it's something the president, i think, has tried to cloud over and in fact speaks in contradiction to what really did happen when taxes were cut. the president is going around saying that he can't afford to keep the tax rates where they are and he needs to raise taxes on certain people, otherwise the government will lose money. the problem with that is, it flies in the face of history. it flies in the face of facts. in fact, your chart shows just what really did happen when taxes were cut for 48 consecutive months after those 2003 tax cuts. for 48 consecutive months, our country had job growth. every single month for 48 months, more american people were working than the month before. and during that same period of
time of unprecedented job growth, eight million new jobs created, your short shows it clearly, not only were those eight million job crease ated but the federal government took in over $750 billion more money. when i say that, somebody listening may say, hold on a second, the president said if you cut taxes it costs money. if you maintain these current rates, rather than raising taxes, it's going to -- you've got to raise the taxes because it's going to cost the federal government money. the opposite happened. any time in history. not just in 2003. as i said, in the 1980's, when taxes were cut under president reagan, tremendous job growth and tremendous growth in revenue to the federal government. yes, we had deficits because even though the federal government was taking in more money, they spent more money than all of that coming in, which gave you a deficit. but if they controlled spending
if they would have frozen levels and had normal cost of living increases, normal growth, you would have actually had surpluses because more money was coming into the federal government and the same thing happened in the 1960's when president kennedy cut taxes. so this isn't a partisan issue but this is history. let's follow history. instead of people making things up and saying things that are flat out untrue. if we go back and use history as our guide, when we cut taxes in this country, job creators go out and create jobs and the facts prove it, president's own website when i pulled the numbers to find out what really happened in terms of job growth, which we confirmed on the president's own website and in terms of more money coming into the federal government. so when they say that they can't afford to keep the current tax rates the way they are, they think they need to raise taxes in order to bring in more money, just the opposite is true. they're exactly wrong. they've got it upside down just as they have it upside down, the american dream is --
mr. akin: they've got it upside downs u just as they think the american dream is to make rich people poorer. i appreciate your perspective and what you're saying is absolutely sustainable -- you can prove it taking a look at the economics. but when i first heard that, i was scratching my head, i'm not a wizard at economics, but i'm an engineer and i was trying to say, wait a minute, you're telling me, that if the federal government redutions taxes, they're going to take -- reduces taxes, they're going to take in more money. that sound like making money run uphill. i started to think about it and it makes a whole lot of sense but here's the way it seems to work to me let's say that congressman scalise is king for the kay and your job -- or for the year. and your job is to raise revenue for your government and the only thing you can do is tax bread.
you start rolling this around in your mind. i can put a penny tax on a loaf of bread or i can put $10 on a loaf of bread. a penny, nobody would notice it but i'd have to sell a lot of bread to make money but if i did $10 a loaf, it wouldn't take too many loaves but on the other hand nobody would buy the bread. your common sense says probably between $10 and a penny tax, there's a number that's an optimum. if you raise it you get less government revenue and if you lower it you get less revenue. what this effect is showing is that we are overtaxing. by overtaxing we're actually losing federal revenue. so what you're saying is exactly right. it's been proven by history. we cannot afford not to cut the taxes. certainly we cannot afford to allow a massive tax increase when the economy is on its knees and unemployment is running at 10%. let's take look at what the numbers were, i think people
might be curious about this. here we have job creation, here's the tax -- this is capital gains, dividends, death tax. that's what this tax cuts were. this is what happened to job creation. let's take a look at another number here. let's look at the gross domestic product of our country. this is kind of a neck snapper of a chart it seems like to me. if you can get into these funny economic charts. this, though, is a reflection of what our future could or could not be. this was the gross domestic product here before the tax cut. here again is the tax cut right here. and take a look at the national g.d.p. it happened a couple of times and we're losing g.d.p. in consume of month when is the recession is bad, 2001. you see it coming up a little bit, up here to maybe sort of a shruggish two. but you see it's spotty, it's up and down. then we put the tax cuts in place and not only did employment change, take a look at gross domestic product.
kabam. we had one quarter here where we had 7.5% g.d.p. growth. that's a pretty decent level. but you can see quite an improvement after this tax cut went into place. now, as you would expect, if you've got g.d.p. going along the right direction, employment going the right direction, here's the other thing and this was your point, my respected colleague. take a look at federal revenues. if the example of the loaf of bread and the tax on it seems a little bit odd, here's the evidence. here's the tax cut. this is federal revenues. federal revenues are tanking because the economy is in trouble. we do the tax cuts at 2003, just like it did with j.f.k., with ronald reagan, all of a sudden you see federal revenues coming
up. now, this is totally opposite everything the president and the liberals are saying. they cannot explain this. this completely puts the lie to what they're saying. if you do not cut taxes, what's going to happen is we're going to continue in this death spiral that we've created. and we've created it out of stupidity. because the facts are here. after that tax cut, four straight years of increases in federal revenue. and so there you have the effect. we are overtaxing, we have stalled the economy, it's a little bit like you're in that little world war ii, world war i plane, whatever it is, and you're in that spiral headed to the ground. and you grab the stick and you pull the stick up and you pull the stick up and the plane just keeps spiraling and the ground gets bigger and bigger as you're losingality fought toed a -- altitude and you pull the stick up and you say, oh, my goodness,
everybody has goten in a grave yard spiral, they almost died and then one guy came along and said, i'm going to do something that's counterintuitive. i'm going to push the stick forward. it's going to allow the plane to stabilize and when it gets stable, then i'll pull the stick-back up. and that's what we did. we have got the economy on a spiral where we're taxing people, we're red taping them to death, the liquidity's a problem, there's uncertainty and we're spending money like a bunch of fools. what we're going to have to do is we're going to have to use some sense from the past, from the people who went before us. and i'd be happy to yield to my good friend from louisiana. mr. scalise: you know when you look at these charts, all it really is -- you know, this is a reflection of what really happened historically. you know, they say if you don't learn from the mistakes of history, you're doomed to repeat them. and so you can flip that around and say, if you go look at what's always been proven to
work, and there are things that have been good and bad throughout history, you can go into the 2000's and look in 2003 when taxes were cut, there were some good things and some bad things that came out of that. the good thing was, when the taxes were cut in 2003, you had, as your chart shows very clearly, you had a tremendous increase in federal revenue and you had a tremendous increase in job creation. eight million jobs were created. the bad thing that happened were that you had deficits but it wasn't because of the tax cuts, it's because more money came into the federal government but congress spent even more than that. and when congress spends more money than is coming in, you end up with a deficit. and you can control that, not by raising taxes, if you raise taxes, again, use history as a guide. when taxes are increased, one of two things happens. in some cases you'll get a flat
line. you'll get a flat revenue intake. but in many cases you get a decrease. even though you're raising taxes, it might seem intuitive to some linls, but what happens is it's the cost of doing business. if a company is looking to hire people and now it costs more money in america to create that job, to manufacture that product, it's why so many of our manufacturing jobs have been leaving this country, going to other countries. a tax increase that president obama is creating might be good for economies but it's good for foreign economies. because it's pushing more and more investment out of this country. so the jobs that will be created will be created in countries like india and china and other places where they don't punish somebody for manufacturing. and our country unfortunately, there is this mentality and there are some in this leadership that continue to try to play this class warfare game and pit one american against another. what we ought to be doing here in congress and at the white
house is working together to put policies in place that will help everybody, that not just help the job creators but that help the people that are struggling at the bottom, the people that want to find jobs. there are millions of americans out there that want to find jobs, you know in my state of louisiana we're seeing the negative repurr kegses of -- repercussions of these policies coming from president obama, how it's costing us jobs. with this moratorium on drilling, where the president bragged about lifting the moratorium on drilling but they've replaced beebe a policy where they're just not issuing permits and then today, gist today, the president and secretary of interior came out and said they were going to shut off more areas around the country that were getting ready to be opened for exploration of energy, they were shutting those off. so now they're not only not issuing permits in the gulf of mexico, which according to the white house has already led to about 12,000 more americans losing their jobs, not because a downturn in the economy, but because of the policies of
president obama, 12,000 more people lost their jobs. billions of dollars left the federal government, are going to foreign countries. our energy security in our country is decreased and we're now more dependent on foreign oil because of the policies of this president. so on one hand he's trying to raise taxes on our small businesses, which as your chart shows is going to devastate the economy, it's not going bring in more money to the federal government and on the other hand he's got policies like the moratorium and the lack of open areas for exploration of drilling for natural resources, which are taking away what would have been thousands more new jobs and now he's shipping those jobs to other countries like brazil and egypt. where some of these rigs are going. you know, it's sad, it's sad to think but it's true. but it's a sad day in america when it's a better business climate to do business in egypt, where some of these rigs are going, than in the united states of america because of the president's own policies. this is reality.
this is what's really happening and that's why we've got the job creation problems. that's why we've got the lack of jobs we have today it's because of the policies of this administration. mr. akin: that was getting -- you're getting -- giving a very concrete example and maybe i was being too general but my point was, if you punish the businesses, you shouldn't be surprised if there's no jobs there. if you destroy the briss, the business is the one that hires people. it's not that complicated. there's a direct connection between employer and employee. and what you've just given an example of is, when you shut the company down, then you can't say, well, i'm so surprised that there's unemployment. you created the unemployment by the policy and it's crazy. it's really crazy. i understand that the president did support some drilling but it was off a foreign coast and it was with american tax dollars, we're encouraging them to drill, but we can't drill on any of the american sites. that just doesn't make any
sense. i think that's what the voters are concerned with. in this last election. i think they're concerned with that. they see that there are ways that we should be going as a country, thanges we can learn from history -- things that we can learn from history and if there's ones we should be dealing with immediately right now, it's making those bush tax cuts permanent. because the economics of that thing works both ways. you cut the taxes, you saw what happened to gross domestic product. it goes up. unemployment goes down. we create jobs. and we create more revenue for the government. if you do the opposite then the result's going to be the opposite. you're going to have more unemployment. you're going to have less revenue. and you're putting us farther into this downward spiral. and our country can't take a whole lot more hits like that. especially with the incredibly aggressive spending schedule. i don't recall specifically whether you were there with dr. laugher today as he was visiting us.
he has some very simple and easy to understand ways, even though he's one of these ph.d.-type economists and all, explaining this. in fact, what we're calling here is name after him, the laugher curve, showing that when you cut taxes, and he's proven that, you're going to actually get more federal revenueless. if you do the right kind of taxes, that is. what he was saying today captured my attention. he said, look, look at it from a simple point of view. if you're a business, are you going to hire somebody? what you're going to say if you're a businessman is, it's going to cost me this much money to hire this guy and if i do hire him, he's going to make this much. and so you take a look at that. and if he's going to make more for you than what it costs you to employee employ him, you're going to hire him. that's the way businesses work. you hire people to make a profit to make your business grow. now, what happens in this equation if the federal government says to the
businessman, ok, now before you hire that guy, just remember this, that we're going to tax you this extra -- we're going to put these additional costs into what you're going to have to pay if you hire this guy. well, you don't have to be a rocket scientist to say, oh, my goodness, if the government starts adding things that the businessman has to pay, it's going to make it harder and harder for him to find the economic case to hire somebody. that's another way of saying that what we've done by these policies is we've made it essentially -- we have driven than you employment number, we have actually created that by foolispolicies down here, by forgetting the simple fact that if you destroy an employer then you're not going to have employees. the simple fact that america wasn't based on class warfare, on covet usness, saying, don't you hate that rich guy? look how much fun he's having, are you having as much fun as that rich guy?
that wasn't what made america great. what made america great is we're all on the same team. everybody wanting to see everybody else prosper, everybody working together, being honest with each other. each following the dream that god put in their own hearts. that's the america that our founders built, that's the america that most americans want to see us returning to. they want to see a win-win scenario and they want to see us do the policies that are right here, because we know we don't create any jobs here in washington, d.c. any time we create a government job it tes two jobs out of the economy. we don't create jobs, but we do affect the playing field of the jobs -- the playing field the jobs are on. why do we want to send jobs to foreign countries? i don't see why we should be doing that. i yield. mr. scalise: the gentleman referred to the meeting that we were both at today with art laugher, the brilliant economist who worked for president reagan and the white house, who helped create a lot of those tax policies, that gave us that unbridled economic growth and he
will go into detail and talks about the decisions that went into that and what works and what doesn't work. and there are things that don't work. mr. akin: right. mr. scalise: but there are things that have been proven historically throughout time. going back to the 1920's, you can go before that. things that you can do that have always worked in terms of cutting tax rates and there are levels where you get above certain levels and in the 20%'s is where you're getting into dangerous territories. right now the president is trying to bring the highest rate up to 39.6% taxes, plus he's going to try to continue to allow this death tax to go to 55%. it's at 0% today. if someone were to die today and have a family business that they built up over their lifetime, they can pass that on to their family and there's a 0% tax on their passing away. a tragic event that shouldn't
be made more tragic by the government coming in and confiscating the business, to the point where a loved one's decision is not just greef, it's dismantling a company their father built over his lifetime to pay the taxes. that will happen, come january 1, the death tax is 55%. one of the most onerous, obnoxious and evil taxes because you are talking about people who paid taxes to create that wealth. one thing art laffer talked about today, creating that wealth and the jobs that went along with it, if he would have gone out and blown the money he wouldn't have been taxed on that. there's no tax on spending the money and employeing with -- blowing it but if the created this business and wanted to pass it on to his children, he government will come in starting january 1, if congress doesn't take action, and tax that business 55% just by the
virtue that that business owner passed away to the point where the family members have to sell and dismantle the family business to pay the taxes. that's not what america is about. that's not what made america great. yet that is tax policy that president obama wants to put in place starting january 1. mr. akin: the thing that's amazing, the way he explained it was a contrast. you have a person, say he's a couple of years away from dying and he has a business that's worth millions of dollars. now there are two courses he can take. the first is he goes and drinks like mad, does drugs, chases women, gambles it all away and in every way wastes the money. does he pay any tax on it? he's already paid the taxes. no. so the government lets him off scot-free for that, we encourage that behavior, but instead he says, what happens if he says, i have a son, i'd
like to pass the business on to my son and he has some employees and they want to buy part of the business and so i'm going to not squander my money but i'm going to save it. so he waits five years, saves his money, dies and now what do we do? we tax the family 55%. how many people have a business , picture if it's a farm or manufacturing business, where you've got to take more than half of it, liquidate it to sell it, in order to pay the tax on it. it's going to destroy the business. we have a policy that rewards people for being totally irresponsible and punishes people for doing the right thing. that's got to be -- as dr. laffer said, that's so contrary to common sense. what are we going to do? we're going to let that death tax go from 0 focht 55%. that is just nuts. what it's going to do, of course is, guess what, destroy
job rerks deuce federal revenues and hurt the g.d.p. yet here we go, because we're some -- we've taxed them every which way but haven't gotten them one last clip when they die. and why we would even have a death tax, it seems so abhorrent that we would let that go on. i yield. mr. scalise: it's such a sad state of affairs that in the greatest country in the history of the world and you and i both know we've got serious challenges and big problems in this country that we're facing but with all those problems, this is still the greatest country in the history of the world. but what that -- that light of freedom, the statue of liberty at the loof of this building right here, the capitol dome, what that statue stands for, when you pass through ellis island and see the statue of liberty, it represents a freedom that exists nowhere
else in the world. and all of that is at risk if these kinds of policies continue. i know that's a dramatic statement, but i think most people across the country have recognized that when you take into account the radical level of spending, the unsustainable level of spending going on here in washington, trillion-dollar-plus deficits as far as the eye can see, first trillion-dollar deficit in the history of our country was last year, only surpassed by next year's and -- last year and next year's looks to be the same, everybody knows we can't sustain this level of spending, then you look and speaker pelosi's plan for taxes is to raise taxes on american people and small businesses. the american people know what that means for job creation. they know it's going to stifle job creation and make it harder for businesses to compete globally and make it harder for many of them to keep their doors -- doors open.
those are policies continuing to be put in place by this administration. people know what's marne all of that, a small business they don't make as much as they did last year, you want everybody to be able to be profitable so they can continue to create jobs but i think to most people, what's most concerning, is not maybe this year they're making less than last year, that's bad, but what's i think is concerning most people is that the one great tradition of this country from the day george washington took that oath of office until this day today, every generation has had better opportunity than the one that came before them. every single generation in the history of our country has had better opportunity than the one that came before them. i think we all know. if we stay on this unsustainable path of spending and taxing with unemployment like it is, the next generation is not going to have that same opportunity and we cannot let that happen. i don't think the american
people are going to let that happen. i think that's why in november in that historic election that was just held a few weeks ago, people said they're not sitting on the sidelines anymore because they know what's at stake. they know we can't keep going down this road. if we want to keep the light lit on that statue of freedom, if p we want to make sure that the promise that's envisioned and represented in the statue of liberty if we want to keep that torch lit for the next generation, we have to make serious changes right now starting today. i think you're absolutely right -- mr. akin: i think you're absolutely right. i think that's what the american people are seeing and sensing. iminge go -- i'm going to put it in different words, maybe just because i'm older than you are, but we had a tradition that the government was to be the servant of the people and it seemed to many of us as though that's starting to tilt and the government is now a fearful master. i think the public is saying, we have had way too much government, we're taking a
look. the problem is -- isn't the outside, the problem is the government and the government has to be reduced back to its servant status, back to the basic principles of economics, back to honoring the traditions of our founders and the dream of allowing people to use their imagination and their ingenuity and to succeed or to fail. if we didn't let thomas ed son fail hundreds and hundreds of times, we wouldn't have light bulbs. you have to allow freedom to work. i think that's where we have to go as a country, we have to go back to the traditional paths that have always worked for us. we are a very unique nation in so many different ways. people around the world, when there's an earthquake or a problem, the americans are there. after world war ii, ke we defeated our enemies and taxed ourselves to rebuild our enemies. we established no empires, built no kingdoms, we are absolutely unique in the history of mankind, and it's
because we have high standards, high traditions and we believe in freedom and the american way. this is the way to turn things around. my good friend congressman scalise, i thank you so much for joining us tonight. i know our time is starting to get a little bit short here. i would once again encourage americans, we know the solutions to move forward, but we're not going to be moving forward if we allow the largest tax increase in the history of our country to settle in on january 1. it will have the same negative effect from the positive effect that first went into place. we don't want that. we have to keep the tax cuts in place. we have to make that decision and move forward for the goofed all of america. mr. speaker, thank you so much. i do yield time to my good friend from the great state of iowa.
the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman from missouri yields back. under the speaker's announced policy of january 6, 2009 the chair recognizes the gentleman from iowa, mr. king, for 60 minutes. mr. king: thank you very much, madam speaker. it's my privilege to be recognized here on the floor of the house of representatives in this great deliberative body that we are. it is a blessing and a gift to the american people that we can have our debates and discourse that ranges back and forth here on the floor of the house and sometimes we're not so polite to each other, i regret that, but the passions arise here rather than having them arise in the streets of america so in a way, we take the lid off the pressure cooker here in the house and vent these issues and find a way to at least sort out the policy that can be accepted or accommodated by the other side and often we're able to
come to a good product that's good and wright for the -- good and right for the american people. madam speaker, i come to you tonight with a number of things on my mind, primary issue that concerns me is what took place here in the house yesterday with the debate on the rule and on the bill and subsequently the vote that spent another $4.6 billion unbudgeted, unauthorized, unacceptable, and not just 41 cents out of every dollar borrowed, a lot of it from the chi commeeze and saudis, but all this money, this is in the authorized, unbudgeted funding is 100% borrowed money because it goes above that level. it was unnecessary money to be spent. so every bit of it was borrowed money. by a volt of 256-152, this lame duck congress this invalidated
congress, this reputed congress, this rejected congress, has gone down the path over and over again of spending money that we don't have for causes that don't have the support of the american people, spent by a congress that's no longer the valid representatives of the people. that's why it's called a lame duck, we should have shot this lame duck a long time ago, it still limps along, flares up and steps in and goes against the will of the american people. i would submit, madam speaker, that if this congress reflected the will of the american people, the gavels would not be changing hands come january 4 of 2011, they'd stay essentially in the same hands with a smaller switch in seats. but we can see this happen over the last four years as the san francisco agenda began to manifest itself here on the floor of the house of representatives. it didn't really get enough traction that the american people understood what was going on until such time as president obama was elected and
his agenda matched up so closely with that of the speaker's agenda here, the san francisco agenda, that the american people could see clearly, by the way, couple with -- coupled with that of the gentleman from nevada, the three of them, harry reid and nancy pelosi and president obama, i said this more than two years ago, 2 1/2 years ago, if you elect this ruling troika, they'll be able to go into a phone booth and do what they will to america and won't be accountable to anybody and i should have said, until the subsequent election. the american people did elect barack obama. and they sent nancy pelosi back here in position to become the speaker, which she was. and harry reid man tain -- maintained his position as majority leader in the united states senate and they did to the best of their extent what they could to america, a whole list of things that aggrieve me and much that should be un-- must be undone. some things that made it through the house and didn't
make it through the senate were painful votes for some of those going home. i regret some of the people on the other side i've worked with who i'm saying good-bye to over this week and the next week. there's this agenda, this agenda i call modern day slavery reparations. some think that might be a rhetorical stretch. but madam speaker, i'll point out, not only did john conyers as chairman 240e6 judiciary committee hold impeachment hearings for president bush and vice president cheney, he said they weren't impeachment hearings but they were, the basis of it i still don't know but i sat in on them. not only did he hold those, he held hearings on a number of things including on slavery reparation. i made the argument that you cannot fix something that happened a century and a half ago. you can't go back and put the blood back in people's veins
when they've paid in blood to put an end to slavery. and you can't hold a generation six and seven generations hence responsible for the sins of the great, great, great, great grandfathers. and the chairman, mr. conyers, respectable individual whom i count as a friend and have always had a good personal relationship with, said that's why we're having these hearings to find out. you think we can't fix the problems by providing reparations, we're hold hearings to see if we can figure it out. if we're having a discussion about whether you can compensate people for labor day they did as slaves in the first half of the 19th century who howe do you sort out who is descended from slaves and who is not. they don't know how to answer the question, but they think there should be a redistribution of wealth. this also comes out of the mouth of our president, it's very clear when he made the
state optometrist joe the plumber when he said share the wealth. and it been clear when he played the class envy card time after time after time and divided americans against each other for a whole series of reasons. and a lot of it has to do with how much money each of us make. forgetting that it's the american dream to become a millionaire, to pile another million on top of that, the second million is easier than the first. how long has it been since we heard that? it might be harder than the first because this president wants to punish the first million and the second million and the third million. hopefully that get it's resolved this week -- that gets resolvinged this week. the redistribution of wealth goes on. those hard core leftist eighth agenda is still driven, the leaders and many of the members of this lame duck 111th congress, if they got the message, their message back to us is a spiteful message against the american people.
which is, so you didn't like debt and deficit and you'd like to have better jobs and growing economy, well our way out the door, we're going to give you a little more of what you didn't like. they're saying to the american people, oh, you didn't like what we gave you in the 111th congress or the 110th congress, you didn't like what we gave you under president obama, well, if you didn't like it, here's some more. that's what's going on in this lame duck congress. if the american people don't like what's been served to them by nancy pelosi and president obama and harry reid, they're saying, madam speaker, to the american people, here's some more. well, here's some more that came at us yesterday. the pigford farms issue. tied together with the cobell issue that has to do with how resources were managed for certain native american tribes. and i'm not an expert on the cobell issue. i have been drawn into the pigford issue. but, madam speaker, pigford farms is this.
it is the largest class action suit in the history of the united states and the single largest recipient of that, her name is shirleyy sher rod. you remember shirley sherrod. she's the lady that was announced on july 22, 2009, that she would be the largest recipient in the largest civil rights case in history, which turns out now to be $2.3 billion to compensate for some discrimination. an amount that i agree there was discrimination and i agree we should compensate people who were discriminated against, it's a very diths difficult task to quantify, however. but shirley sherrod received the news of the award of $13 million to her and whoever the people she might decide to distribute it to. we don't have access to those records. these cases are apparently sealed.
on the 22nd of july, 2009, tom vilsack hired her. because she's the largest civil rights recipient in the largest case in the history of america and the case is pigford vs. vilsack, the secretary of agriculture. timothy pigford filed the suit and the class action lawsuit and so his name, the first plaintiff's name is listed as the name of the suit, vs. the secretary of agriculture which was glickman and it became then the successor secretaries until it became tom vilsack. but it was tom vilsack that was named then in the suit of successor and the largest resint yep was shirley sher rod and what does he do after it was announced she would receive $13 million? hires her. i can't fathom hiring somebody that had sued me, that had pushed for a settlement that turns out to be $13 million,
first and the next place is, what do they need the job for? and why would i reward them with a job? what else was going on in the mind of the secretary and shirley sherrod that he would put her on the payroll and make her the director of usda rural development in the state of georgia? this all came to light because there was a youtube clip of shirley sherrod's speech before the naacp that, in its edited version, appeared to make some racist statements. and i saw the speech and the totality enough that i accept the overall message on what she learned from that. and so i'm not taking issue with the totality of her speech but she was fired apparently for the clip that was out and the clip i think is the clip that was available to the website that posted it, what was available at the time. but in any case, 13ds million resip yebt in the largest -- $13 million recipient hired by the people she sued three days after the settlement agreement, the
settlement announce came down and that's just a piece of pigford farms. pigford farms has been dragging on for years and what happened was dan glickman, then secretary of agriculture under bill clinton as president, stepped up and announced that they had discovered that there was discrimination taking place by the u.s. department of agriculture employees against black farmers, primarily in the south, because that's where they live, and when that happened it opened up the class action, the lawyers went to work and they produced what's now pigford one, the first settlement consent decree. it was approved by judge paul friedman. i brought this decree or his opinion, excuse me, madam speaker, with me to the floor tonight. and if those might think -- and i say this is a modern day version of slavery reparations, i would point out that in the case, the first words in the
opinion of judge paul friedman are this, 40 acres and a mule. 40 acres and a mule. madam speaker, he goes on to lament that he can't fix all of the wrongs that come out of slavery and the segregation in one civil rights suit. one can read between the lines that he's sorry that he can't fix it all, one can read between the lines that he may well be glad to hear a pigford two proposal come before him so he could ratify it once congress has appropriated an additional $1.15 billion. here is what judge friedman wrote about the pigford settlements, these $50,000 settlements that were paid out to black farmers for -- they had to meet four criteria. had to be african-american, they had to have farmed or wanted to farm, they had to have believed they were discriminated against and they had to have attest that
they filed a complaint that could have been verbal to a usda employee, a member of congress, a couple other categories. that's four criteria, actually the fifth one was then that someone, not a close family member, had to sign an affidavit that attested that they had not only believed they were discriminated against but they had complained about it, not necessarily in writing, but it could have been verbally, to any usda employee under any circumstances, it didn't have to be a public meeting with witnesses. it could have been walking down street and you meet someone who might be the director of your county f.s.a. and you say, i don't think your people treat med right, i should have had a loan. that would be all it would take. if you didn't get the loan you didn't even have to apply. you would think you wouldn't be treated right and failed to apply for the loan. that's enough. you wouldn't have to approve discrimination. you have to allege it and get a friend to sign the affidavit. that's all that's required under
pigford one and then according to judge paul friedman, he writes this, the consent decree accomplishes its purpose primarily through a two-track dispute resolution mechanism that provides those class members with little or no documentary evidence with, and i'm quoting from this opinion, madam speaker, with a virtually automatic cash payment of $50,000 and forgiveness of debt owed to the usda and anybody who believes that that's not enough, they can actually sue on their own and prove it by the preponderance of the evidence. but there's no proof required to receive the $50,000 virtually automatic cash payment except to get a friend to sign the affidavit that says that you complained about it and you believed you were discriminated against and then all it had to be was to allege that you were turned down for a loan or a farm
program of some time or another. madam speaker, $1.05 billion were distributed under no basis beyond that. no requirement or proof of discrimination and i'm very, very -- and a very, very low level of even asking them if they actually ever complained or filed a complaint. and no verification required that they ever farm or ever applied for a usda loan or a program, you didn't have to farm. you just have to say, i'm black, i wanted to farm and i believe they discriminated against me and i complained about it and i've got a friend that will sign the document. that's it, madam speaker. and $1.05 billion were distributed on that basis and virtually automatic payments. much of it debt forgiveness included and if anyone actually was a farmer and actually did have debt with the usda, all of their debt was forgiven also. and judge paul friedman said,
virtually automatic payment if you didn't want to go through track two and get a bigger check than the $50,000 and the debt forgiveness. which judge friedman calculates that the average settlement would be $183,500. now, we don't have an accounting from the usda on how large the average settlements are. we don't have the spread sheet of the 22,500 applicants that poured in after the direction of this opinion by judge friedman and the consent decree that accompanies it, directed that there be town hall meetings across the south, that the attorneys on this case, in order to earn their contingency fees, needed to go out and promote this and they needed to put newspaper ads in and radio ads in. i believe there was also television, i can't verify that for sure. and hold meetings and call people to them and we have reports from throughout the south that there were meetings that were held in churches and
town hall meetings and that they were told, this is your 40 acres and a mule, you need to come and sign up for this and this is what you have to attest to in order to get the $50,000 check and if you have any debt it will be forgiven. now, if you present that and if you have attorneys working on contingency fees, you have the perfect mechanism for fraud. and so as we look across the south, i can't believe that all of the counties discriminated against are african-american population equally. i'd have to believe that if discrimination took place and i believe it did, that it took place sometimes in a county there would be none because the culture of the office in that county would be such that everybody gets treated equally, with respect, and promptly, with all the help that they can give with the staff that they have. i believe that takes place in at least some of the counties in the south and i believe it has for a generation or more.
i suspect and i don't have reason to believe but i suspect that there were counties on the other side of that spectrum where they as a matter of practice discriminated against african-americans and these are the cases that i believe needed to be compensated. but i can't believe that it was the same level of discrimination across all of these counties. and when i see applications and i have a stack of these applications, most of which were paid out, and they named the same usda employee as the one they complained to and they give the location and the date and that usda employee was not at that location, could not have been at locations that -- as far apart as they were claimed, as many dates as were claimed, and why would it be that one usda employee had all of these complaints and yet nothing was done about the discrimination?
it's this, that they offered the name over and over again. it's kind of like, if you see an individual's name and when he looks through all these amplecations and i've looked through stacks of them, when i look through them and i see the same name of the usda employee, i see the same hand writing on application after application, i can see that the narrative has been changed just slightly from application to application, if they were numbered chronologically, i can tell you what's going on. there's an attorneyed staff that's sitting there filling out applications. they may be interviewing the individuals. the individuals signed because they would get the check and the attorney would get a contingency fee out of this. we don't know how much that is. the i.r.s. gets paid also and as a matter of settlement. so it's a $50,000 virtually automatic payment as judge friedman says. there's also a $12,500 check that accompanies that that gets mailff